DLSS 3.5 has issues

[BFG10K]

Still causes obvious smudging and ghosting like the old denoiser.

Only works with full path tracing so almost everything will be a slideshow unless you upscale from low resolution or use performance DLSS. And a lower framerate exacerbates the temporal artifacts.

Certain individuals in this forum repeatably tell us "DLSS is better than native!" but that's objectively false. It's funny how every time a new version of DLSS is released, reviewers have no trouble finding obvious flaws all over the place with the old version.

"The more you ray trace, the more you save [pixels]!" -Jensen.

It's the same as it always was: severely degrade overall image quality and framerate just to get ray tracing, or instead run ultra rasterization at a higher resolution and framerate, with lighting effects almost as good.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Look how bad the ghosting is on the NPC walking by the fence at 1:02 in Daniel-San's video. It's high comedy watching him pimp the new feature while that is going on in the same exact scene.

 

[Tup3x]

It's the same as it always was: severely degrade overall image quality and framerate just to get ray tracing, or instead run ultra rasterization at a higher resolution and framerate, with lighting effects almost as good.

Speak for yourself. I get it, you absolutely love low res cube maps, screens space reflections that disappear completely when you happen to just look down, weird glow, light leakage, disconnected shadows and other stuff since you always then to shouting how much you love ancient rendering tech.

I happen to find those much, much more annoying than blurring or and slight ghosting. Ray reconstruction is quite large step forward and shows that things can be improved with smart algorithms. Going to get better one way or another (brute force and/or improvements in algorithms). Yet somehow you manage to make it sound like ray reconstruction is absolute trash when it's clearly superior overall to existing methods. Also did you really expect it to be absolutely perfect? I don't get what is your problem... all these step are important and seeing how tech is evolving is really interesting. Progress has been massive even since path traced Quake 2.

I absolutely hate screen space effects. They are real immersion breakers and I hope those will be a thing of the past soon. At very least I hope screen space reflections and ambient occlusion would go away.

 

[coercitiv]

Maybe some more context is in order for the posts above: for an early release, let's call it a 0.9 version, the technique is very good (in technical terms, that does not change it's proprietary nature). The marketing isn't saying anything about an early release though, there's a lot of buzz around CP 2077 2.0, and Ray Reconstruction is presented as a wonder solution, with no mentions of the drawbacks and more importantly the software limitations for today: path tracing and DLSS need to be enabled for reconstruction to be available.

The second issue I have with Ray Reconstructin is the same I began having with Ray Tracing in general: every time RT effects become more powerful in a game like CP 2077 is the time when Nvidia and and media decide to talk about the IQ issues we had in the previous iteration of RT. When Path Tracing became available, we found out that Psycho was still using too many raster effects to be considered true RT. With reconstruction we found out that denoisers are eating into reflection properties, they introduce temporal lag, and smudge away fine texture detail.

Third, personally I like Ray Reconstruction, but this needs to end up as a standard (not this exact implementation), otherwise we're on a very dangerous path (1st pun) towards a divergent (2nd pun) gaming experience on the PC. And make no mistake, AMD and Intel will emulate this, resulting in an even greater chasm between development priorities and artistic tuning for either of the software ecosystems.

More on this was already nicely written by a reddit poster, emphasis mine:

I've been testing Cyberpunk for past few hours and RR really is amazing, also unlike HUB I did encounter areas where RR boosts the FPS by flat 10-15%, but it really does depend on the scene. My biggest issue with RR the technology itself but the fact that it is Nvidia only, upscaling and framegen work agnostic of what the image is, if they improve the image quality that's more a happy coincidence, but RR targets improving the image and it's never going to be perfect as long as devs can't use it as a primary method of denoising.

As long as the devs target their game also for consoles and AMD cards (which for triple-A games is basically always), then when making the game the way the image looks is never going to referenced while looking at what RR produces. They are always going to look at what the image looks on their denoiser. If there is a surface that doesn't reflect the light as the artist imagined, they are always going to tweak for their denoiser, not RR.

I think Nvidia should strongly consider open sourcing somehow at least this portion of DLSS so when devs are making a game with Raytracing, RR is going to be their primary denoising method. And since it will likely mean more and higher quality RT in games, gamers who want more FPS with RT will buy the Nvidia cards since they are the best at it. The devs would also be more likely to add RT to games, because using Nvidia's denoiser instead of having to write custom ones simplifies the job a lot. Though I get that this is more a wishful thinking.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

The second issue I have with Ray Reconstructin is the same I began having with Ray Tracing in general: every time RT effects become more powerful in a game like CP 2077 is the time when Nvidia and and media decide to talk about the IQ issues we had in the previous iteration of RT. When Path Tracing became available, we found out that Psycho was still using too many raster effects to be considered true RT. With reconstruction we found out that denoisers are eating into reflection properties, they introduce temporal lag, and smudge away fine texture detail.

This cannot be overstated. It's all the evidence anyone should need to understand the obscene level of marketing the tech press does for them. I worry for Aussie Tim; he might be turned to the darkside with how he has become the Nvidia liason.

 

[KompuKare]

Over on TPU, W1zzard seem to be in love with it, but the last image in the comparison pages is brutal:

NVIDIA DLSS 3.5 Ray Reconstruction Review - Better Than Native

NVIDIA DLSS 3.5 launches today, supporting GeForce 20 and newer. The new algorithm improves the looks ray traced lighting, reflections, shadows and more. In our DLSS 3.5 Ray Reconstruction review we test image quality, but also discovered that VRAM usage actually goes down and performance goes up.

www.techpowerup.com

Apparently DLSS 3.5's RR is, you've guessed, one again "better than native".

Better than native: because who wants to see the marble texture on the floor anyhow? Nice and blurred and soft is better?

Better than native: the reflections of those lanterns needs to so soft and blurry because that's all RR can do?

IMO it's a very heavy price to pay for a lighting being a bit better.

 

[coercitiv]

the last image in the comparison pages is brutal:

Indeed, textures are experiencing major loss of detail in the entire scene, and it's not DLSS doing it (they have DLSS shots which look fine):

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Watch the reflection of the podium on the right keep flickering in and out. Video will start at the correct time.

There are scenes in this video during the benchmark passes where the palm trees at the end look smudged with petroleum jelly using it. Obviously because the performance hit is so large, he had to use aggressive upscaling. This tech may be the future, but we ain't there yet. This full court press is all to help sell overpriced Nvidia graphics cards this holiday season.

Non RT reflections are bad eh? Atomic Heart ditched RT for release. Planar reflections in the games opening fooled PCgameshardware. That super shill capframx tweeted their article with a screenshot showing the RT was awesome! Rest assured the legions of casuals would never know the difference either.

 

[KompuKare]

That super shill capframx tweeted their article with a screenshot showing the RT was awesome! Rest assured the legions of casuals would never know the difference either.

That's worth framing!

The ordinary RT (and now PT) evangelists must either be so smitten by lighting and reflection that they no longer see the texture quality dropping like the difference between low and high or ultra.

Or - since it is unlikely they have not noticed - confirmed bias is affecting what they choose to see.

EDIT: "(and now PT)" not "not"as my phone got me to write originally.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

confirmation bias is affecting what they choose to see.

Bingo.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

BTW with how hard DF is pushing this, and the amount of content they are churning out for it. Can we just start calling them Digital Founder's Edition? 🤣

 

[Panino Manino]

Isn't always like this? When a new version comes out it has its problems, but with time updates fixes many of them.

Much better than AMD, that launched FSR2.2 in January, I think, and how many games are using it?

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Isn't always like this? When a new version comes out it has its problems, but with time updates fixes many of them.

Much better than AMD, that launched FSR2.2 in January, I think, and how many games are using it?

Good example of buying into the gaslighting. This hobby is so infected by the constant propaganda/marketing that they have almost everyone bamboozled. You are doing a compare and contrast between warm dog crap that stinks really bad, and old dog crap that stinks less. What if we stopped comparing dog crap like any of it is acceptable?

Red Dead Redemption 2 is a gorgeous game. It has zero ray tracing. I'd be perfectly happy if every game looked like that. Everything about this latest media blitz is trying to force a narrative that I need ray tracing in my life. And furthermore, to ante up for an expensive RTX 40 series so I can access the newest iteration.

 

[SolidQ]

Red Dead Redemption 2 is a gorgeous game. It has zero ray tracing. I'd be perfectly happy if every game looked like that

That videos show how beautiful RDR2, and that made for PS4

 

[DAPUNISHER]

That videos show how beautiful RDR2, and that made for PS4

The problem is it runs like a champ on fairly modest hardware. They can't sell $1200-$2000 cards to run games like that. Since no need exists, they create one. Then throw their money and their immense weight in the industry around to promote it as THE thing.

RTX has been on the market 6yrs now. It has still brought nothing worthwhile to gaming besides future promise. Only 1 in 4 gamers that even see and respond to polls, gives a flying rat's ass about it. And due to the nature of how those polls are conducted most respondents are PCMR members. Not your average console peasant. That ratio would be much worse if the demographics were bigger. The what is ray tracing? choice would be bigger than the number that care about it.

Message boards are infected with social media agents and the kool aid brigade. The reality is after 6 years of hype I need an expensive GPU and upscaling to look at ghosting so bad it is like an LSD flashback, flickering path traced reflections, and petroleum jelly textures. All of the gas lighting, astroturfing, and digital founder's edition content in existence isn't getting me to join the cult.

I'll welcome my improved visual overlords when they get here. Right now I have to deny the evidence of my own eyes and pretend I see what they do. Hard pass.

 

[NTMBK]

The problem is it runs like a champ on fairly modest hardware. They can't sell $1200-$2000 cards to run games like that. Since no need exists, they create one. Then throw their money and their immense weight in the industry around to promote it as THE thing.

This is 100% why. There's no point going beyond 4K resolution or 120hz, so Nvidia can see the end of the road for traditional raster improvements. They could increase their VRAM size and memory bus so that we could have more detailed assets, but that just means more money to the RAM manufacturers, and that ain't gonna buy any leather jackets

 

[SolidQ]

RTX has been on the market 6yrs now. It has still brought nothing worthwhile to gaming besides future promise.

When i'm was watching world of tanks devs interview 2019, he's saying real RT gonna be in 15+ years.
For now i'd prefer improve raster especially, world details with nice textures/polygons/non main characters/AI/Physic. Now we have good main characters, but mostly poor world details/polygons, for RT need special engines.

digital founder's edition

Never understand them, for them almost every game have superior graphic. My big complain to DF, they tested old and simple games like Forza/F1/Control
Where is latest games, like Daniel Owen test? oh wait NV not so strong in latest games.

Here in video 17 hours rendering with 4090, and it's only room

 

[Panino Manino]

Good example of buying into the gaslighting. This hobby is so infected by the constant propaganda/marketing that they have almost everyone bamboozled. You are doing a compare and contrast between warm dog crap that stinks really bad, and old dog crap that stinks less. What if we stopped comparing dog crap like any of it is acceptable?

Red Dead Redemption 2 is a gorgeous game. It has zero ray tracing. I'd be perfectly happy if every game looked like that. Everything about this latest media blitz is trying to force a narrative that I need ray tracing in my life. And furthermore, to ante up for an expensive RTX 40 series so I can access the newest iteration.

First want to point out that I consider myself a "Nvidia and Jensen hater".

That being said, I agree that in a ideal world game should run at the native resolution, but that's no the discussion. Shouldn't be.

Of course this new feature will debut with problems, like happened before. And just like it happened before the problems cam be fixed, and they will.
In the end Nvidia is still offering and diverting more than the competition. Their biggest rival has a "weaker" solution that it can't even make developers use right. Nvidia at least is trying and putting and effort.

 

[Jaskalas]

RTX has been on the market 6yrs now. It has still brought nothing worthwhile to gaming besides future promise. Only 1 in 4 gamers that even see and respond to polls, gives a flying rat's ass about it. And due to the nature of how those polls are conducted most respondents are PCMR members. Not your average console peasant. That ratio would be much worse if the demographics were bigger. The what is ray tracing? choice would be bigger than the number that care about it.

I have to imagine UE5 and Lumen will help put Ray Tracing into the mainstream, within one console generation.
Doesn't mean the public would necessarily appreciate and care for it anymore than they already do, but it should at least become much more standard and less of a hassle.

 

[JustViewing]

For the next version of DLSS, you don't need RT. AI will convert raster images to look like it is generated from RT.

 

[eek2121]

Over on TPU, W1zzard seem to be in love with it, but the last image in the comparison pages is brutal:

NVIDIA DLSS 3.5 Ray Reconstruction Review - Better Than Native

NVIDIA DLSS 3.5 launches today, supporting GeForce 20 and newer. The new algorithm improves the looks ray traced lighting, reflections, shadows and more. In our DLSS 3.5 Ray Reconstruction review we test image quality, but also discovered that VRAM usage actually goes down and performance goes up.

www.techpowerup.com

Apparently DLSS 3.5's RR is, you've guessed, one again "better than native".

Better than native: because who wants to see the marble texture on the floor anyhow? Nice and blurred and soft is better?

Better than native: the reflections of those lanterns needs to so soft and blurry because that's all RR can do?

IMO it's a very heavy price to pay for a lighting being a bit better.

You appear to be making the (wrong) assumption that you must use DLSS with RT.

I haven’t tried the latest CP2077 update, but I always disable DLSS completely in the games I play, yet I enable RT. Games that use RT look amazing. Better than anything shaders can do…

This is 100% why. There's no point going beyond 4K resolution or 120hz, so Nvidia can see the end of the road for traditional raster improvements. They could increase their VRAM size and memory bus so that we could have more detailed assets, but that just means more money to the RAM manufacturers, and that ain't gonna buy any leather jackets

8K TVs are a thing, and 2x4k monitors are also a thing. Once LG releases an affordable 8K OLED panel, we will begin to see a shift upward.

I have to imagine UE5 and Lumen will help put Ray Tracing into the mainstream, within one console generation.
Doesn't mean the public would necessarily appreciate and care for it anymore than they already do, but it should at least become much more standard and less of a hassle.

Lumen looks FANTASTIC. I own 1 game that uses it (that I know of) and despite the fact that it doesn’t even use the RT cores (it uses the CPU for calculations), it is pretty mind blowing.

 

[NTMBK]

8K TVs are a thing, and 2x4k monitors are also a thing. Once LG releases an affordable 8K OLED panel, we will begin to see a shift upward.

How the hell can anyone see the difference in resolution from 4K? 1080p to 4K is already pretty marginal a lot of the time. We're deep into diminishing returns.

 

[eek2121]

How the hell can anyone see the difference in resolution from 4K? 1080p to 4K is already pretty marginal a lot of the time. We're deep into diminishing returns.

Depends on TV size and viewing distance. Also, people used that argument about smaller 4K displays. I have 2 4K 27” inch monitors sitting in a closet and let me tell you that you can absolutely see a difference over 1080p and 1440p (I have 2 of each of those as well)

Jaggies are less jaggy, Fonts are smooth and crisp, etc.

 

[NTMBK]

Depends on TV size and viewing distance. Also, people used that argument about smaller 4K displays. I have 2 4K 27” inch monitors sitting in a closet and let me tell you that you can absolutely see a difference over 1080p and 1440p (I have 2 of each of those as well)

Jaggies are less jaggy, Fonts are smooth and crisp, etc.

• 480p->720p - "holy shit, it's so much clearer!"
• 720p->1080p - "oh wow, it got even better"
• 1080p->4K - "Huh, I guess it looks a bit sharper if I look closely"
• 4K->8K - "hold on, lemme check the settings and make sure it's in 8K mode, I'm not sure"

I'd much rather see them stick at 4K and focus on reducing power consumption, physical size, and cost.

 

[amenx]

Looks great in CB 2077 (vid is available, watch on YT link)